Oregon Legislature Join Anti-Ethanol Fight
The Oregon legislature now is considering five bills that would limit the use of ethanol in the state. The bills are in response to complaints about: the product raising food prices, ethanol mileage reduction vs. gasoline, and the wear of the ethanol on small engines.
Currently most fuel in Oregon contains ten percent ethanol. The Oregon State Marine Board cites caution for using ethanol blended fuel in boats. They say that ethanol can dissolve the inside of certain boat fuel tanks and ethanol absorbs more water.
Oregon Governor Ted Kulongoski is a supporter of the renewable fuel who helped push biofuel tax breaks through the previous Legislature, along with a requirement that Oregon’s gasoline contain 10 percent ethanol. That requirement kicked in statewide Jan. 1.
In 2008, the Legislature created exemptions that allowed the sale of “clear” gasoline without ethanol for boats, power tools, aircraft and other uses. But opponents of the ethanol standard said too few stations provide ethanol-free gasoline to make the exemptions practical.



13 Comments »
Mike Massey
I have an IDEA! Let’s ALL join the ANTI-CRUDE OIL FIGHT and not buy gasoline from OUR FOREIGN ENEMIES or from DESPOTIC REGIMES that want to END Western Civilization.
God Bless the Corn Farmer! – You know that guy who was our First President – who handed out Corn Hooch for votes. I wonder what he would say to the Anti-Ethanol crowd?
Ken
Energy Independence ——- Let’s not support oil producing countries that want to destroy us. ——– Support ALL alternative fuels programs including ehtanol, biodiesel, CNG, electric automobiles, and hydrogen. We need to convert gasoline stations to refueling stations that offer a choice of fuels.
The high price of oil last year contributed to the recession we are in and helped push consumers over the edge. As soon as the recession is over OPEC will raise prices again.
We need to reduce our dependence on foreign sources of energy. Let’s produce our energy here at home and provide jobs for the US population. Sending our money over seas is not the answer.
We need to diversify our supply of energy. Wind, solar, biofuel will all contribute to our energy independence.
Mitch Sremac
What is wrong with the legislature in OR.? The issue surrounding food for fuel was proved to be a false claim trumped up by the grocery manufacturers and the oil companies. U.S. Senator Chuck Grassley’s committee proved that the whole food for fuel issue was untrue. Actually, it was determined that the cost of transportation was the real culprit for the rise in food price.
The issue surrounding reduction in mileage from ethanol is minimal at best. My company has done extensive testing on E85 vs gasoline, and we found the fuel economy loss to be about 1 mile per gallon when the vehicle is equipped with our flex fuel conversion system. Certainly we do not see a twenty to thirty percent loss. The bigger question is whether the minimal savings in fuel economy from burning gasoline outweigh the cost in fighting greenhouse gas emissions, and whether are we willing to keep sending our hard earned dollars to foreign dictators who want to destroy our way of life? I think not…
It is time for both state and federal legislators throughout our great nation to stop accepting the views of high paid special interest lobbyists. Campaign contributions from special interest groups should not be the determining factor as to what side of an issue a lawmaker is on, it should be what is best for the citizens they represent, and for the country as a whole.
Respectfully,
Mitch Sremac
CEO
Flex Fuel U.S.
Cyrano54
Way to go Oregon. Consumers need a choice. Let them choose whether they want to choose highly subsidized, lower efficient fuel, that raises food prices. Yes… That was proven by the USDA recently. Ethanol contributed to 15% of the rise of food over all will it contributing 50 to 80% rise in some of the basic necessities. Chuck Grassley is a dolt. He walked around the Senate asking people if they would eat a handfull of field corn. Once they said they wouldn’t he proclaimed that corn must not be food then. Apparently the same tactic would have worked with a pig under his arm. Corn is food. Corn feeds some of our food sources. Ethanol is 66% the energy content of regular gas. So E-85 is 71% the fuel mileage of Regular and E-10 is 96% percent of Regular. Fuel Independence is a joke. That old saw has been around since the 1970s. If you stopped doing business with people you didn’t like or didn’t like you the world would grind to a halt. Those who think we get most of our fuel from the Arabs haven’t looked at the EIA reports. Most of our crude comes from Canada, USA, and Mexico. Enemies????
Mike Massey
Hey Cyrano54,
EIA report January 2009 Imports to USA:
1.3 million barrels per day – Venezuela ruled by Communist Hugo Chavez who publicly denounces the U.S.A. as a fascist imperialist.
1.3 million barrels per day – Saudi Arabia – jihadists – 9-11
0.5 million barrels per day – Iraq – the war for how much US tax payer cost?
0.5 million barrels per day – Russia – remember the Cold War – what did it cost to fight that one? Vietnam, Korea, Afghanistan?
Takes 2.2 barrels of oil to make 1 barrel of gasoline. Takes 1.6 barrels of oil to replace 1 barrel of ethanol.
U.S. farmers are producing 0.65 million barrels of ethanol per day. Does that replace a million barrels of oil per day that it would take to make gasoline?
I’m not trying to discount the importance of all the energy we use within a barrel of oil – diesel, jet fuel, asphalt.
I’m just saying that I love the choice of using Mexican, Canadian, and American fuel.
The more we blend ethanol, the more we are able to say No to importing crude oil from Venezuela/Hugo Chavez – like we have said No to Iranian imports.
I as an American, I deserve more choices. Thank you biofuels industry.
Cyrano54
Your logic on importing oil as a weapon can be turned on its head. Do we deny exporting grains and other foods to all countries we don’t like? How about not letting them buy our cars or machinery we manufacture? What about our software? Playing this isolationist game puts the US in the same thinking of the 1930s where we had a resurgence of isolationist policies put in place that agravated the Great Depression. When or if we were to deny exporting out goods to other countries we don’t like then what do we do with the jobs lost? How do we defend ourselves in the WTO trade courts where we can be fined or have countervailing sanctions placed on us for our actions? Funny how too little thinking is involved in this ENERGY INDEPENDENCE BS. Maybe someone should talk to the Japanese who have been trying to be food independent for 70 years.
flee
Those marine engines need more ethanol not less. That’s right, as a low dose ethanol blend could be a problem if fuel contaminated with much water. Although, this is still better than a slug of water within unleaded fuel and resulting engine stoppage.
Increase blends to 15 or 30% ethanol and water contamination problems disappear. The fuel naturally absorbs water. The combustion not inhibited. Oil mix ratios may have to change to accommodate oxygenated fuels such as ethanol containing water. Better to optimize oil blends for task at hand. Petro oil just different in this regard. Ethanol is clean burning and more efficient a more capable fuel for engine performance. A better engine lubricant maybe synthetic a.k.a. vegetable oil blends. These oils better for waterways anyways and offer superior lubrication qualities.
Long term Marine fuel should be 100% ethanol. As it’s environmentally superior fuel for water craft considering fuel spills and water contamination. Plain gasoline a horrible fuel for our lakes, rivers, and ocean going crafts.
Marine engine manufacturers should test and develop an appropriate strategy to switch fuel to ethanol. But, ethanol should be the fuel requirement for our waterways not petroleum base. Lol, I would rather have a drunk fish than a dead fish.
Mike Massey
Cryano54,
OPEC controls the spigots of oil to Western Nations. The fuel industry is an oligopolistic marketplace. My aim is to see the fuel marketplace become more competitive. The agricultural industry, the utility industry, and the fuel industry must compete with each other to resolve our energy challenges. Vehicles will be powered by a combination of stored electrical power and liquid fuels for energy on demand.
My question to you is how can pure market competition within the fuel industry lead to a Depression?
Americans protect the Straights of Hormuz for that “free flow of Mid East oil” that you declare is cheap and “in our interests” to trade under a comparative advantage market model. I say the cost of our military in American lives and US Treasury to control the peace within the Middle East region is expensive and should not be born on US taxpayers as a “Hidden Tax” on imported oil that we do import in significant quantities; yet, the quantities can be nullified, with a properly developed biofuel industry; as well as, changes within the development of vehicle design that can use alternative energies such as electricity, biofuels and fossil fuels.
When I walk into a grocery store I have a thousand choices to fuel my body. When I drive to a gas station to fuel my car, I have ONE choice – gasoline – for my gasoline powered vehicle. I HAVE run my gasoline powered vehicle on E-85 with a conversion kit. No big deal. Runs just fine on renewable fuel. Costs a little more out of my pocket, BUT in reality IT DOES’N'T. I don’t support the foul Jihadistic or Communistic liquid coming half way around the world with OUR tax dollars supporting its protection to be delivered to me to fuel my car. ITS expensive, ITS wrong, and IT STINKS. SO DON’T FORCE ME TO USE THAT EXPENSIVE FOREIGN FOUL STENCH! I’M tired of it – I want more choices! I choose to support my local biofuel industry.
So my next question is, “How much does Imported IRAQI crude oil cost the American Consumer?” How much does Saudi Arabian crude oil cost the average American? We pay how much tribute in U.S. Tax Payer dollars to support the Palestinians? How much FREE food in TRIBUTE have we dumped their way?
So lets get the Arabs off the Government Dole and find out who really can compete for the energy needs to power our personal mobility. My bet is everything changes IF and WHEN our MILITARY evacuates from the Persian Gulf. Let the Arabs and Persians duke it out over the control of oil to feed Western Civilization. Our Western Civilization can consume a different energy source.
Cyrano54
More efficient??? How? Ethanol is 65% the BTUs of Gasoline and sold much of the time at the same cost. Most boaters have had severe problems with ethanol. Why would you want any water in your fuel. The reason ethanol absorbs ethanol is because after is is distilled it goes though energy intensive process of the last 10% of water extracted. Ethanol then will try to attract water back to its natural state up to 10% throughout storage. The other problem is availability. Everyone keeps talking about the merits of an additive without considering supply of such an additive. If you could get 150 mpg on Gold in your engine would you use it? No, it would cost you millions to drive to work or sail the lake. Neither would it be feasible at infinite money because the limited supply of gold. Convert the whole corn crop to ethanol and you displace 6% of gasoline usage. Cellulosic ethanol is 6 times the cost to produce and it on a broad scale would wipe out the prairies and cut down forests to produce a significant amount of fuel. Even CARB had to acknowledge that most of the alternative fuels suggested in their meeting do not exist, or are a decade away from being near economical.
Cyrano54
There is no war for oil. That old wives tale is just that. The reason you have gasoline for your car is its the best fuel to fuel it. You could drive a diesel. I have a car that runs on gasoline and one that runs on diesel. You could also walk, bike, live close to work. You could work at home. There. Several choices of fuel available. I lived a mile from work for over 2 years. It was a real money saver to walk. Comparative advantage is an economic law no matter how much a government tries to interupt it through policy it will be the dominating factor eventually. There is no correlation or causation between displacement of crude oil by biofuels and conflict involving the military. Displacing 5% of crude won’t lead to a 5% decrease in Hormuz defense because that is not why we have a military. The world runs on crude oil, and it will for a long time. Those who shun the most cost effective ways of powering their economies will find themselves in decline. There is a great book called “40 centuries of wage and price controls” it tells historical how controlling an economy by dictoral mandate only leads to decline, including retricting trade. There is a hidden tax on biofuels. Its not hidden to those in the industry. Did you know that the government provides a mandate of production with fines for coming up short in the production in ethanol/biodiesel. One top of that the Federal government pays $1.00/gal for biodiesel in subsidies and $.45/gal for ethanol to the Oil and ethanol companies. Its not represented to the public that way at the pump and even then ethanol/biodiesel is more expensive per mile than gasoline. The Ethanol plants are still losing money even with a mandate and a subsidy. The military is a fixed cost of government, too many of the biofools regard it as a variable cost and somehow consider them the guarders of the energy stores of the earth. OPEC is not the majority of production nor the keeper of the world supply. Like any other large loose confederation, their is constant defections. Regularly, despite the press, the cuts they announce in production are not met. Too many players need the money. Right now they have to pay for all these free programs for their public that they promised when crude was more expensive and despite crude 33% of what it was before they still have to make good on the legacy programs they put in place. Sound familiar…
Mike Walker
If ethanol worked I’d be all over it. 2000 Tacoma mileage went from 20 to 17 MPG Hwy. 2008 CR-V went from 30 to 26. Same driving style, etc. That’s more than 15% worse! It would be better to buy NO additive and LESS gas and STILL get more miles. The ethanol thing is a joke. Official estimates vs. real world have never matched – look around car sites and Consumer Reports. Older cars are worse. I’m all for renewable but air would be more efficient. This is pure politics at the expense of average Oregonians. I’m yet to hear of someone getting a net gain of mileage from ethanol. MAYBE if cars were engineered differently it would matter. BUT they are not. They are built to tolerate ethanol. Those with motorcycles will also know that it is damaging our engines. Good luck finding gas that doesn’t have it. Who’s getting paid off where? And it is ridiculous to think that ethanol will change oil dependence on the Middle East. Read up on that myth. This is politics and buying votes at our expense. Nothing more. Let’s get rid of a law that pretends to be environmentally sound but is really a sham.
Mike Massey
I’ll run the math, Mr. Walker. According to EIA, ten years ago, we had 2 million barrels per day from Alaska and the West Coast refineries were filled and we imported just 25% of our needs from Canada, Mexico and from some other countries. Today, West Coast refineries must import over 50% of their crude oil feedstock that Alaska can NOW only supply just 800 thousand barrels per day.
So my question to YOU, sir, and the other “Ethanol Naysayers” above – just where are West Coast refineries buying the 1.2 million barrels per day shortfall that Alaska isn’t providing us?!? (Ya the caribou are bleating in ANWR slipping on the untouched crude oil as we speak)
And where will we be buying crude oil to feed our refineries — TEN YEARS from NOW?!? Ummmmm… Pretty Good Questions – Aren’t They?…..
So with our farmers, they have just ramped up and started producing over 600,000 barrels per day of ethanol to replace some gasoline —- which requires 1 million barrels of crude oil per day to refine into less than 500,000 barrels of gasoline per day.
So you want to import more crude oil, eh? So we just keep bending over the OPEC barrel – more and more every year. I’m just not interested in that scenario anymore. As a US citizen, I believe in choice and importing more every year from OPEC is not the choice I want to make. So I support efficiency, I support more drilling in ANWR, and I support more ethanol development in this country. So that makes me not concerned about your boat or your small gas powered weed eater. Don’t blame ethanol, talk to your equipment manufacturer to fix the problem and move on.
know a thinkg or two about cars
you all do realize that the more ethanol you mix in the more fuel it takes to get the vehicle to run properly? to run full ethanol on the exact same motor current tunes are pushing through 30%+ more fuel as compared to gasoline to make same power and get less fuel mileage. so here we have a substandard product that pollutes slightly less, but you burn 30% more and get worse gas mileage. yeah i can see why everyone likes it. oh did i mention the detrimental impacts on food prices? how about ho every gallon of ethanol made takes 3 gallons of fresh water to produce and is destroying native habitat and lower water tables?
crude oil is not good, but ethanol is a worse answer.
Comments RSS feed — TrackBack URI
Leave a Comment